So when the appearance of a disgraced cardinal threatened to cast a shadow over his first engagement, Francis I made sure it couldnt happen again  by banning him from his own church.

Cardinal Bernard Law resigned as Archbishop of Boston in 2002, after being accused of actively covering up for a litany of paedophile priests.

Despite the scandal which exploded to engulf the entire church, he was given an honorary position at the Basilica Santa Maria Maggiore, in Rome.

Though now retired, the cardinal still enjoys a grace and favour apartment in the cathedral complex. So hearing that the new Pope was offering prayers at the very same church, it seems he couldnt resist a discreet peak.

But when Pope Francis recognised him, he immediately ordered that Law be removed, according to Italian media reports. He went on to command: He is not to come to this church any more.

One of the new Popes first acts will be to arrange new cloistered accommodation for the disgraced cardinal, the Italian daily, Il Fatto Quotidiano, reported.

“”Cardinal Law was present in a discrete manner in the chapel along with the members of the chapter and confessors, having been until recently the Dean of St. Maria Maggiore. Then he returned to his home. Nothing to add. “ Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican press office, told Adnkronos in response to journalistic speculation whereby yesterday Pope Francis during his visit to the Basilica of St. Maria Maggiore in Rome, told Cardinal Bernard Francis Law, to keep away from the Basilica.”

Vatican City is recognized,under international law,as a sovereign nation and one would think that the Pope is the Prime Minister,Justice Minister,etc.So could the Pope actually *expel* him from Vatican City,thus opening him up to possible extradition? Hmmm....

26
posted on 03/15/2013 3:04:38 PM PDT
by Gay State Conservative
("Progressives" toss the word "racist" around like chimps toss their feces)

The pontiff did not want to share the first images and the first public images with a prince Vatican macchiatosi of enormous sins, and has held the thought, or rather the desire: "I do not want this church still frequent." Although deprived of any office, Law still resides in the palace of Santa Maria Maggiore. Fact is that the pontiff Argentina, as the first act of cleaning, is willing to transfer to the prelate in seclusion would be perfect. It would be a revolution for the Vatican who protected Law subtracting the American judicial process. Because in 2004, while in the United States began the process and the Diocese of Boston paid compensation millionaires, the Cardinal of Torreon was elevated to archpriest of Santa Maria Maggiore, one of the four patriarchal basilicas, that papal, along with St. Peter, St. John Lateran and St. Paul Outside the Walls.

Note the phrase horribly translated by Google: "I do not want this church still frequent." The Italian for frequent is "frequenti" -- which is the second person singular. In other words, perhaps it should be translated: I do not want you to still frequent this church.

Now clearly the idea of "cloister" is the imagination of the reporter...but if, if the reporting of the statement by the pontiff is correct...he is saying that he doesn't want the notorious Law to frequent the basilica any more.

Fascinating ... Previously, the anti-catholic herd brayed that Law should be in prison. Unfortunately, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts found no grounds for putting him there. So ... Benedict XVI removed Law from power in Boston, and stuck his sorry carcass in a meaningless post in the Vatcian. Now, Francis wants to remove Law from his meaningless post and stick him in a cloistered monastery ... as close to incarceration as can be legally done with him ...

Is the anti-Catholic herd now going to bray that Law should be cut loose? Really?

If members of the anti-Catholic herd wonder why Catholics treat their opinions with contempt, perhaps the anti-Catholic herd should look no further than its own inconsistency and its own perpetual offendedness.

32
posted on 03/15/2013 3:10:02 PM PDT
by ArrogantBustard
(Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)

Extradition to where? Massachusetts? On what grounds? The guy may be a dirtbag, but the Commonwealth's Attorney found nothing with which to charge him. Stick him in a monastery, feed him bread and water. It's more than the secular authorities could do to him.

33
posted on 03/15/2013 3:12:46 PM PDT
by ArrogantBustard
(Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)

Despite the scandal which exploded to engulf the entire church, he was given an honorary position at the Basilica Santa Maria Maggiore, in Rome.

Every Cardinal has a Rome-diocese church at which he conducts services when that Cardinal is in Rome, or so I understand.

So by barring Law from one of the perks of Law's cardinalate, Francis is rather forcefully inviting Law to disappear. (I don't know whether a pope can dismiss a cardinal. I tend to doubt it, particularly where the cardinal at issue was given that office by a prior pope. Anyone know?)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.